Should Khan have faught Prescot?

Prescott is a fight that could only take place in the UK. Ud get a alot of viewers on ppv to see that fight again due to what happened the 1st but I cant see the Americans being too bothered about the fight. It would have to be a support fight to a main event and I cant see khans people allowing that.

 

I agree and his last fight which was a voluntary and in the UK, should have been that fight.

 

Tell me something i dont know :hey

 

Adding to the points made above, what has Prescott done to deserve a shot at the 140lb WBA title? Maybe if he beats a few top 10 contenders then it could be interesting. He's based his whole career on one win.

 

To be fair you cant really use that point in a Khan argument.

 

I see that the standard of dickwad on here hasn't improved in my absence :-(...but probably never a truer word been said

 

He has already beaten the champion.

Erm... for that matter what the **** had Khan done to warrant a shot at WBA 140LB title?

 

Prescott is irrelevant now. The only time this fight would of made sense was right after the first one. Since the Barrera fight there has been no need for this fight.

 

I love all these clever ****s who pull out the whole: "Well Haye has to beat Thompson"/"Pac has to avenge his defeats" blah blah blah. Easy trick in the book to discredit something - take it out of context. Those fights are totally irrelevant to AK/BP

Khan was beaten in the most brutal fashion possible - KO in round 1! Not only was it brutal but painful to watch, you could see how hard he was trying to get up but he was smashed so hard his body could not respond.

It was his first fight on PPV.
He was headlining a massive show in his hometown against someone everyone thought was shite.

Whatever he has done in the last three years does not change the fact that Prescott has already destroyed in the most impressive fashion.

"Maidana is a bigger puncher than Prescott and Khan beat him..." Yeah well done but it was Prescott who completely hammered him.


The reason why Khan isnt a massive PPV star in the UK is because he doesnt have the casuals. The casuals only know him as "Silver Medal" + "Knocked clean out 1st round". He will never become a big PPV seller in the UK unless he avenges a Prescott defeat. If he fights him and wins then he will become the star he should be.

It is just so obvious so why didnt he just fight Prescott instead of Mccloskey? If it is going to be an easy victory then it wouldnt jeopardise any unification would it? So HBO would still pick up the July 23rd fight then.

 

:good

 

glad you can see it too mate! :good

 

Prescott is the one that ****ed up here. He had a great argument to get a title shot but he took Frankies money and lost to Mitchell.

As for "if he fights and beats Prescott he'll become the star he should be", what a load of.......

 

In my eyes, your eyes and most on here we know Khan is a top drawer boxer. The casuals, the type of people who know little but buy PPVs all see him as a kid who got sparked and isnt as good as was made out. The only way of getting round this is fighting him and beating him. Its that simple.

Its the wider audience he needs to appeal to in order to shift PPVs like say Hatton did. The few thousand hardcores on here wont cut it.

Just because you dont like it doesnt make it untrue.

 

:good:good:happy:happy

 

And just because you make crazy statements like that it doesn't make them true either.

Fighting Prescott has an angle to sell the fight on but Khan beating him will not propel Khan one step nearer to being "the star he should be" or any nearer to Hatton-like levels of popularity.

Talk about clutching at straws to justify a fight.....fair enough the revenge angle is one that could appeal to people (not me) but if you want to see this fight then lets at least keep the reasons for it realistic.